Maybe, probably it is still legal because no explicit case says otherwise. All the past cases are different from Apple vs. Psystar cases. For example, in the Adobe vs. SoftMan case, the software was not installed. EULA is still the base of software commerce and it is risky to think certain kind of restriction in it is invalid just because you don't like it.

I don't think it's invalid because I don't like it. I think it's invalid because I think it's actually not within Apple's rights to sell you a disc with software and then reveal, upon opening it, that your ability to use that software is crippled by restrictive caveats.

The reason you think Apple can't do that is still you don't like that, because there is no case to say Apple can't. When you buy a disc of music, you mustn't play it publicly. When you buy a book, you mustn't OCR it and put it on the Web. We live such restriction everywhere and won't change it in the near future.